Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a St. Louis Blues sweater
← Thu, Nov 6 · the slate
Breakdown · STL at BUF

Blues shut out the Sabres, 3-0

FinalThu, Nov 6
STLSt. Louis Blues3BUFBuffalo Sabres0
The verdict · stolen

The Blues stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.44–3.31 and won anyway.

STL 3 · BUF 0
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:48 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Blues stole this one. Buffalo controlled 58% of expected goals and still lost 3–0—one of the season's most lopsided results.

How? J. Hofer's save percentage. The Blues' goaltender stopped 3.3 goals above expected, turning the Sabres' dominance into a shutout. Buffalo generated more shot attempts (28–17) and more quality looks (5 high-danger chances vs. 4), but Hofer treated their chances like a hostile foreign concept.

The Sabres' undoing wasn't a lack of chances; it was conversion rate. They finished 0-for-5 on high-danger opportunities and 0-for-3 on rebounds despite crashing the net effectively. St. Louis, by contrast, was ruthless when it mattered: 2 goals on 5 high-danger chances (40%) and 2 goals on 16 rush attempts. That's efficiency.

The game pivoted on J. Faulk's wrist shot from the point at 18:58 of the third, a moment that crystallized St. Louis's opportunism. The Sabres had dictated play for two periods. Faulk's goal made their dominance irrelevant.

U. Luukkonen's 0.875 save percentage (14 of 16) didn't cost Buffalo the game—the team's inability to finish did. Three rebound chances created, zero converted. That's the difference between a close loss and a rout.

M. Joseph led the St. Louis attack with 1 goal and 2 assists in just over 12 minutes, a statement of compression: maximum impact in minimal ice time. Faulk added 1 goal and 1 assist in 24:16, orchestrating from the point. N. Bjugstad chipped in 1 goal in 11:27, another efficient outing.

Buffalo didn't lose this game because they were outplayed. They lost because they couldn't finish and faced a goaltender having the game of his season. That's the definition of a heist—dominate play, create the better looks, and still leave with nothing. The Sabres will wonder how they managed it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 6
STL
3
BUF
0

Blues shut out the Sabres, 3-0

Chances 2.4 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Sabres deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
STL
2.44
BUF
3.31
42% of the chances58%

The board read STL 3, BUF 0. The chances read STL 2.4, BUF 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
STL
+0.6
goals above expected
STL2.44 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
BUF3.31 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Sabres left 3.3 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 12:38STLM. JosephSH1–0
  2. P2 02:42STLN. Bjugstad2–0
  3. P3 18:58STLJ. FaulkEN3–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
STL
26 shots
3
Final
67 shots
BUF
41 shots
0
STL attackBUF attack
STL BUF Goal
26
shots · 3 in
41
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
STLBUF
2 / 5
1.65 xG
High danger
0 / 4
0.93 xG
0 / 5
0.51 xG
Medium
0 / 15
1.71 xG
1 / 28
0.27 xG
Low
0 / 41
0.67 xG

The Sabres went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Hofer
+3.3
STL · 28/28
B
U. Luukkonen
+0.4
BUF · 14/16
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blues shut out the Sabres, 3-0

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 08 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 4–7
  1. 12:38STLM. Josephshorthanded1–0
2ndshots 8–9
  1. 02:42STLN. Bjugstad(J. Faulk, M. Joseph)2–0
3rdshots 5–12
  1. 18:58STLJ. Faulkempty net(M. Joseph)3–0

score reads STL–BUF

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.44
STL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.6
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.079
STL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
38.8%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.44Expected goals3.31
BUF 58% of the chance quality
17Shots on goal28
5High-danger chances4
38All attempts (Corsi)60
Adjusted for score: STL 34% · BUF 66%
Faceoffs · BUF won61%off47%neu24%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
STL2 / 5 · 1.65 xG
BUF0 / 4 · 0.93 xG
Medium dangermid-range
STL0 / 5 · 0.51 xG
BUF0 / 15 · 1.71 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
STL1 / 28 · 0.27 xG
BUF0 / 41 · 0.67 xG

BUF went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.71 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
STL
3 G · 2.44 xG · +0.6
BUF
0 G · 3.31 xG · -3.3
01234

STL finished +0.6 against expected, BUF -3.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
STL
WRIST3/18
SLAP0/1
BACKHAND0/3
SNAP0/2
TIP IN0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/12
BUF
WRIST0/23
SLAP0/8
BACKHAND0/4
SNAP0/1
TIP IN0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/19
STL
BUF
Off the rush
2 G on 16
1.70 xG
0 G on 28
2.63 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
0 G on 3
0.33 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 3-for-18, BUF 0-for-23. STL scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG
Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD
High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi
Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.
Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx
Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO
Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected
J. Hofer
STL · 28/28 · 1.000
+3.3
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/40.9+0.9
Medium0/151.7+1.7
Low0/410.7+0.7

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

U. Luukkonen
BUF · 14/16 · .875
+0.4
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/51.6-0.3
Medium0/50.5+0.5
Low1/280.3-0.7

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

67 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
STL
26 shots
3
Final
67 shots
BUF
41 shots
0
STL attackBUF attack
STL BUF Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, BUF right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Joseph
#71 · R · STL
1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 12:21 on ice · +3
J. Faulk
#72 · D · STL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 24:16 on ice · +2
N. Bjugstad
#77 · C · STL
1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 11:27 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Nov 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:43 PMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The model calls this a pick'em: Sabres 53% to win, with both teams projected in the 2.5–2.6 goal range. Rarely does a matchup sit this close to even.

Buffalo's the hotter team—5-1-4 in their last 10—while St. Louis sits at -16 goal differential over the same span. The underlying 5v5 metrics barely separate them: the Blues hold 49.0% xG and 48.0% Corsi, while Buffalo edges ahead at 50.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi. The Sabres' 1.020 PDO is running hot and will regress; the Blues sit at 1.000, neutral.

A. Lyon faces a back-to-back decision for Buffalo—watch for a backup start or a tired starter.

St. Louis leans on Jimmy Snuggerud (15G, 22A, 0.86 xG/60, 11.9% shooting, 2 high-danger goals) and Dylan Holloway (13G, 24A, 0.82 xG/60, 10.8% shooting, 1 high-danger goal). Holloway's scoring has outpaced his expected output, a warning sign of unsustainable finish.

Buffalo counters with Jason Zucker (14G, 14A, 1.07 xG/60, 15.1% shooting, 6 high-danger goals) and Josh Doan (15G, 18A, 1.01 xG/60, 11.5% shooting, 2 high-danger goals). Zucker's six high-danger conversions prove his scoring is tied to genuine opportunity creation, not luck.

Both teams are mired at 0% efficiency on high-danger and rebound chances—a recipe for variance. The team that exploits Jimmy Snuggerud's and Jack Quinn's defensive weaknesses will likely find the edge in an otherwise even contest.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

BUF 53%
53%
BUF
Model favorite
47%
53%
STL50BUF

BUF by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score STL 2.5–2.6 BUF; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG
STL← edge
edge →BUF
49.0%50.0%
48.0%49.0%
2.342.55
2.402.55
2.002.35
2.121.90
1.0001.020

BUF holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 1.020) says BUF has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
STL
2-6-2
-16 GD · 2d rest
BUF
5-1-4
+6 GD · 1d rest
1.000
STL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.020
BUF PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch
  • The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • A. Lyon is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Sabres are the hotter team by points pace (5-1-4 in their last 10).
  • The Blues are underwater at -16 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
STL
Expected in goal
J. Binnington
2 days rest.923 last start
Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

BUF
Expected in goal
A. Lyon
back-to-back.943 last start
Backup Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen · +10.5 GSAx this season
Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
STL
Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A
0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh
Dylan Holloway13G 24A
0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh
BUF
Jason Zucker14G 14A
1.07 xG/60 · 6 HD · 15.1% sh
Josh Doan15G 18A
1.01 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page